Noah

Noah is a historical epic without a clear target audience, combining pop elements from family fantasy movies with depressing psychological scenes in which the blade of a knife hovers above a toddler’s head. Ugh. It is visually beautiful with incredibly contradictory content. It’s been a long time since I saw film that I so much don’t want to see again. (03.04.2014)

This is what happens when a filmmaker succumbs to delusions of his own exceptionalism. Delusions, it must be said, fueled by the ecstatic cheers of his devoted fans. (24.07.2014)

Biblical Noah has made me anticipate a totally epic movie since the very beginning of that project. Actually, the story itself is the best and the most essential story of it all, with pure good and pure evil facing one another. All of this has been getting prepared by possibly the most interesting director of the present time – Darren Aronofsky. Would you expect anything else than an epic movie? I probably wouldn’t. And maybe that’s also why I had to get used to this movie for the first twenty minutes. During that time, I was able to recall reading some articles about Darren having some issues with this movie and the producers forcing his hand or crossing out many of his scenes. But that’s when I was able to get used to the metaphorical conception of this movie. I also got used to the absolutely beautiful Icelandic sceneries, which seemed to resemble the Moon’s landscape. I also enjoyed the awesome music by his go-to composer – Clint Mansell. And I certainly can’t forget about Noah himself – Russell Crowe. It all started to blend a little and after the uncertain beginning came the biggest preparation for the greatest catastrophe in the history of mankind. Throughout the last 40 minutes, it even kept on building up in such an amazing way that only Aronofsky can do nowadays. It doesn’t bother me that this is actually the most classic case of revenge, disappointment and human qualities as such. I enjoyed the beautiful shots, such as when Noah’s silhouette is facing the dawn of the sun, the time-lapse sequences or shots of the whole animal kingdom coming to the Ark. Such scenes are simply unforgettable. Just like this movie is unforgettable to me – even though it’s not perfect, but neither is the Ark story itself. (01.04.2014)

Animals and Manicheans. How do you combine a disaster feature film of biblical proportions with an intimate drama about a father / sons relationship, succession and the moral implications of being "chosen" by the Creator? It’s labor-intensive. Noah alternates between the successful tricks, but at the core ordinary "big compositions" on the border of post-apo, fantasy and new age screensavers with very intimate positions. These are characterized by Darren's precise work with detail of faces and Libatique's contact-raw filming. The first half, which ends with the epic battle of the Ents with the goblins, offers more flashes of attraction, which the more cohesive second half surprisingly takes advantage of. The intimate drama on a schooner full of sleeping animals and Old Testament cruelty has intensity, overlap, and a wonderful thing called the Russell Crowe factor (considering that at one point he plays Noah, Abraham, and himself, it's a gargantuan performance). It is a pity that another dove of peace in the epic breadth of the post-catastrophic landscape kills the impressive catharsis in the form of a gesture, and also the discovery that the whole metaphysical framework of the "creator" is in fact more of a purposeful machination ensuring that "fantastic" things happen in the first half, whilst in the second half heaven is significantly silent and impressively torments the hero. Unfortunately, Noah's message is New-Age banal, i.e., "treasure all living beings, respect them, and multiply in the love that exalts us above innate evil." Noah simply sways between shallow spiritual pop-up and unexpectedly good details. P.S. The greatest miracle of creation is just Divine Emma, isn't it? [60%] (26.03.2014)

The Tolkeinite inside me is surprised to find where the Hobbits disappeared to when Isengard was flooded. The believer inside me is incensed over disrespect to the Word of our Lord and the unbeliever in me just shakes his head in disbelief over that really current “love Gaia" message... In any case, the movie has its own style and is interesting in the best meaning of the word; however much incongruous and slightly (really) slap-dash. Two thirds is a post apocalyptic vegan version of The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers which perilously frequently topples on the brink unintentional ludicrousness, but doesn’t fall over it, thanks mainly to the charisma of Russell Crowe. The last third, however, suddenly becomes a heavy, existential intimate psycho-thriller with classic (although unfaithful to the Book) Old Testament dilemmas. And that is utterly outstanding. It just doesn’t have any connection with the preceding catastrophic epic fantasy. (27.03.2014)

As long as Darren Aronofsky and Clint Mansell keep going back to the style of The Fountain, everything is in the best order, and I just marvel at how this well-known theme can be told purely through characters in epic settings. And it doesn't even matter that Darren turned the script into something like Transformers: Origins. But when Noah's escalating paranoia starts to explicitly infuriate, I start shaking my head at times, and at that point the dramatically mature Emma Watson has to salvage more than she should. Actually, even a day after viewing, I couldn't decipher the puzzle with incredible visuals and annoyance from constant dialogues about the Creator or what is right. But because I'm not sure about any potential second viewing, I won't climb any higher even with the best will in the world. (27.03.2014)

The crossover to feature film was a success. Aronofsky relishes in mirroring today’s humanity with the descendants of Cain. Dream sequences and trippy tales from the first chapters of the Bible, maintains the same fascinating effectivity that glues the viewer’s your dry eyes to the screen. Russell is excellent, his acting hasn’t been that good for a long time and he handled the work that his Noah has to perform with flying colors. The purpose of building the Ark is a little bit different here, almost turning the picture into a thriller toward the end and giving it a depressing aura only dispersed by Watson at the end. Lots of people fault Darren for selling out to Hollywood, but I can’t sincerely imagine that anyone else would have filmed a better Noah. Or that it wouldn’t have been so distinctive. I have nothing to fault (maybe Noah’s shaved nut, that was a bit extreme). Too little controversy? Not shocking enough? Too biblical? For God’s sake... You’re saying I don’t I have to do it?! (31.03.2014)

A tangle of something philosophical, wrapped in an attractive, visually polished package. Visually graceful and phenomenal in terms of special effecsts, with hard-hitting contact action (thanks to the great Libatique), and plenty of interesting scenes both aesthetically and emotionally. But overall, a strangely conceived biblical story that alternates between pure epicness (panoramas, music, battles) and gloomy melodrama (the ark, relationships, social issues). It works well separately, but when it comes to intertwining the two, it's not as successful. Additionally, Aronofsky in some scenes gets too psychedelic again and unnecessarily gets carried away by his own fantasy, which incredibly irritates me in all of his films, it gives me a headache. I only felt a message or some kind locally, rather than iconically. (29.03.2014)

I liked the comic book (by the same authors as the script) better mainly because the world in which the story takes place is much more interesting - it's actually a classic post-apocalyptic landscape with remnants of various cities, factories, machine wrecks and so on. The film was left with only hints, not even Tower of Babel made it into the film, and I wonder what led Aronofsky and Handel to deviate so far from their own original work in the adaptation. Otherwise, though, Noah isn't downright bad, although for me Darren Aronofsky remains the director of a single outstanding film (yes, The Fountain). Russell Crowe's fanatical position was very convenient. (06.07.2016)

An ambitious jumble that is nice to look at, but also reflects why Aronofsky’s films get so many mixed responses; it’s packed with epic and fateful stuff, but lacks a strong author’s voice and a coherent motif. It’s held (literally) above water mostly by the actors and the rich narrative, but it’s so overstuffed that nothing else is memorable. (29.01.2019)

I had been looking forward to this movie for a long time and after reading the comic, at least its first two parts, I was very curious how Aronofsky would handle it. Well, he didn't handle it perfectly. The digital sequences, and there are really a lot of them, are not perfect, they lack a lot in some places and it just doesn't look good in some places. A biblical story as dark fantasy, why not, but there are moments that simply don't work and that are too much indebted to the source material, when you actually get something that wants to appear different, but in the end it isn't. Nevertheless, a slightly different perspective on Noah, but really only slightly different, appealed to me. (04.08.2014)

Incredible hodgepodge of just about everything, so that there is a little something for everyone. In result, it has no actual target audience, so logically nobody gets what they came for. I was expecting a disaster movie full of bombastic special effects, (judging by the cast) great acting performances and a well-narrated biblical epic. Unfortunately, I didn't get any of that, only a below-average sketchy movie, which just doesn't deliver. (21.08.2014)